![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Mile 1069.4 at Dania Beach, Broward County, FL
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: July 3, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 128)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 44553-44555]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr03jy02-12]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD07-01-143]
RIN 2115-AE47
Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway,
Mile 1069.4 at Dania Beach, Broward County, FL
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.
ACTION: Temporary final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is temporarily changing the operating
regulations of the Dania Beach Boulevard bridge across the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway, mile 1069.4 at Dania Beach, Florida, from July
31, 2002 to November 15, 2002. This temporary rule allows this bridge
to only open a single leaf of the bridge on a regular schedule. Double
leaf openings will be provided during certain times. This action is
necessary to facilitate repairs to the bridge.
DATES: This rule is effective from 8:01 p.m. on July 31, 2002 until 6
p.m. on November 15, 2002.
ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public as well as
documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket
are part of docket [CGD07-01-143]
and are available for inspection or
copying at room 432, Seventh Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, 909
S.E. 1st Avenue, Miami, Florida, 33130-3050, between 7:30 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Michael Lieberum, Project Officer,
Seventh Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, telephone 305-415-6744.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory Information
On February 21, 2002 we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled ``Drawbridge Operation Regulations: Dania Beach
Boulevard Drawbridge, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Florida'' in the
Federal Register (67 FR 7991).
On April 16, 2002, PCL Constructors, who were hired by Florida
Department of Transportation, notified the Coast Guard that due to a
safety issue involving the welding of deck plates, the bridge should be
put on a single leaf opening schedule as soon as possible, and
requested this be done to facilitate repairs. The Coast Guard met with
Florida Department of Transportation representatives on April 22, 2002
to discuss this request. After this meeting the Coast Guard determined
that to best facilitate the needs of navigation and bridge repair, the
bridge would be put on a 20-minute, single leaf opening schedule with
double leaf openings available with 2 hours advance notice to the
bridge tender. On June 13, 2002 the Coast Guard published a notice of
temporary deviation from regulations entitled ``Drawbridge Operation
Regulations; Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Mile 1069.4 at Dania
Beach, Broward County, FL'' in the Federal Register (67 FR 40606). This
deviation allows the bridge operator to only open a single leaf of the
bridge from June 4, 2002 until July 31, 2002 with double leaf openings
available with 2 hours advanced notice to the bridge tender.
Background and Purpose
The Dania Beach Boulevard bridge, mile 1069.4 at Dania Beach,
Broward County, Florida, has a vertical clearance of 22 feet at mean
high water and a horizontal clearance of 45 feet between fenders. The
existing operating regulations in 33 CFR 117 require the bridge to open
on signal.
On November 7, 2001, the Coast Guard met with the Florida
Department of Transportation representative, URS to discuss altering
the Dania Beach Boulevard bridge regulations to facilitate a major
rehabilitation of the bridge. The representatives stated that due to
the comprehensive nature of the repairs, which includes rebalancing the
bascules, they would only be able to open a single span of the bridge
for a period of 45 days during the months of September and October. URS
requested the bridge be allowed to only open a single leaf of the
bridge on the quarter hour and three-quarter hour during these 45 days.
Double leaf openings would not be available during this time period
because one span will be inoperable. Since the notice of proposed
rulemaking was published, URS determined that the 45 days will begin on
September 5, 2002 and end on October 19, 2002.
On April 16, 2002, PCL Contractors notified the Coast Guard that
the work on the bridge bascules had started and due to safety issues
involving welding deck plates, the current on-demand bridge schedule
raised safety concerns and impeded their work. As a result, they
requested a 20-minute, single leaf, opening schedule. On April 22,
2002, the Coast Guard contacted URS to discuss this request. As a
result of that meeting, the Coast Guard determined that operational and
safety concerns justified a 20-minute, single leaf, opening schedule.
Double-leaf openings
[[Page 44554]]
will be available with 2 hours advance notice to the bridge tender.
This action is necessary to facilitate worker safety during repairs to
the bridge without significantly hindering navigation. This schedule
will run from July 31, 2002 until September 5, 2002 and then again from
October 19, 2002 until November 15, 2002.
Although this schedule will run for a longer period of time than
that proposed in the notice of proposed rulemaking, safety issues that
were only discovered after work commenced justified this additional
single leaf schedule. The schedule for the additional time still
provides for single leaf openings 3 times an hour and provides for
double leaf openings with 2 hours advance notice.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
We received 2 written comments and one verbal comment to the notice
of proposed rulemaking. The Florida Department of State found that the
project would not affect historic properties. The National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration stated that any adverse effects that may
occur on the marine and anadromous fishery resources and essential fish
habitat would be minimal so did not have any comments. A representative
from Marine Industries of Fort Lauderdale verbally told the Seventh
Coast Guard District Bridge Branch staff that he did not oppose the
proposed bridge operating schedule. The Coast Guard has not received
any comments on the notice of temporary deviation from regulations.
Regulatory Evaluation
This rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does
not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order. It is not ``significant'' under the
regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Transportation
(DOT) (44 FR 11040, February 26, 1979). The Coast Guard expects the
economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory
Evaluation under paragraph 10e of the regulatory policies and
procedures of DOT is unnecessary because this rule only temporarily
modifies the bridge's operating schedule and still provides for regular
single leaf openings.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Coast
Guard has considered whether this rule will have a significant economic
effect upon a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities because this rule only temporarily modifies the bridge's
operating schedule and still provides for regular single leaf openings.
We are only aware of one vessel that will be unable to pass through the
bridge when double leaf openings are unavailable from September 5, 2002
until October 14, 2002. The vessel operator has agreed to moor on the
other side of the bridge during this period.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule so that they can better evaluate
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the rule
would affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please consult the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We also have a point of contact for
commenting on actions by employees of the Coast Guard. Small businesses
may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or
otherwise determine compliance with Federal regulations to the Small
Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the
Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman
evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness
to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of
the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247).
Collection of Information
This rule calls for no new collection of information requirements
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory
actions not specifically required by law. In particular, the Act
addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local,
or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100,000,000 or more in any one year. Although this rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.
Civil Justice Reform
This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Execute Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and would not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not
[[Page 44555]]
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. It has not been designated by the
Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a
significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement
of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211.
Environment
The Coast Guard has considered the environmental impact of this
action and has concluded that under figure 2-1, paragraph 32(e) of
Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, this rule is categorically excluded
from further environmental documentation. A ``Categorical Exclusion
Determination'' is available in the docket we have indicated under
ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 117 as follows:
PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for Part 117 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 49 CFR 1.46; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g); Section
117.255 also issued under authority of Pub. L. 102-587, 106 Stat.
5039.
2. A new temporary Sec. 117.261(rr) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 117.261 Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway from St. Marys River to
Key Largo.
* * * * *
(rr) Dania Beach Boulevard bridge, mile 1069.4 at Dania Beach, FL.
(1) The Dania Beach Boulevard bridge, mile 1069.4 at Dania Beach, FL
need only open a single leaf of the bridge on the hour, 20-minutes
after the hour, and 40-minutes after the hour from 8:01 p.m. on July
31, 2002 until 12:01 a.m. on September 5, 2002 and from 11:59 p.m. on
October 19, 2002 until 6 p.m. on November 15, 2002. A double-leaf
opening will be available if 2 hours advance notice is provided to the
bridge tender.
(2) From 12:02 a.m. on September 5, 2002 until 11:58 p.m. on
October 19, 2002, the Dania Beach Boulevard bridge, mile 1069.4 at
Dania Beach, FL need only open a single leaf of the bridge on the
quarter hour and three-quarter hour.
Dated: June 26, 2002.
J.W. Stark,
Captain, Coast Guard, Acting Commander Seventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 02-16754 Filed 7-2-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P